Tag Archives: Eric Holder

They are amazing, literally never taking “no” for an answer (and this is not about Bill…). The following comes in the wake of the liberal loss on Justice Kavanaugh and their foreknowledge of the blue toilet swirl next month. Loss or no loss, they can really fire up the base.

They Make the Call:

Eric Holder, who sold discount machine guns to drug dealers and terrorists until the market collapsed from saturation (then gave them away until no one wanted any more), told it like it really is:

“Michelle always says — Michelle Obama, I love her, you know, she and my wife like really tight, which always scares me and Barack, but Michelle always says, you know, when they go low, we go high,” Holder went on. “No. No. When they go low, we kick them.”

His call for “kicking” Republicans drew a quick applause from the crowd.

And Hillary Clinton, famous for the Vince Foster mur 2016 election loss, boldly confirmed the three laws of SJWs:

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,” Clinton told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again.”

Police and FBI agents searched a Hudson Valley, New York, home Wednesday and arrested the 56-year-old man living there after learning about his alleged plan to build a bomb and blow himself up in Washington, D.C. on Election Day, two law enforcement officials told News 4 New York.

Court documents say Paul Rosenfeld wanted to draw attention to his belief in an ancient election system called “sortition,” a method of choosing political officials at random.

Officials tell News 4 Rosenfeld had no criminal history but had told a reporter in Pennsylvania he planned to blow himself up on the Washington Mall around Election Day because he was angry about the country’s direction.

FBI agents pulled over Rosenfeld while he was driving on Tuesday, and he confessed to the plot, telling them he ordered black powder over the Internet and built a bomb in his basement.

Authorities searching his home found eight pounds of black powder explosive meant to be used in a bomb that would ultimately weigh 200 pounds.

He had no plans to hurt anyone else, officials said. He is believed to be a lone actor not affiliated with any international terror group or ideology.

Dear FBI: Please check those above quotes by known international terrorists and reconsider this “lone wolf” assessment.

BTW: the ancient and viable sortition angle is BS, mere cover floated by the enemies of the American people at press time.

Just last night I thrilled you, my dear readers, with a few news stories concerning the law. While Attorney General Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder refuses to prosecute super-rich banksters for criminal wrong-doing, he has no problem using drones to murder “ordinary” Americans for any reason or no reason. Well, in his defense, He said the drones would only be used to thwart catastrophic events like the 9/11/2001 or Pearl Harbor attacks. I don’t believe him. It doesn’t matter since he’s not in charge of when the triggers are squeezed.

This morning I was listening to the radio and had the privilege of hearing my friend Austin Rhodes (WGAC, 580 AM, Augusta) give his morning commentary. He initially praised Senator Rand Paul (Ron’s son) for his filibuster yesterday which targeted the administration’s dystopian law enforcement policies. Then he surprised me. He, playing devil’s advocate, asked if a drone strike on David Koresh (remember him?) in 1993 would have prevented the later bloodshed at Koresh’s Seventh Day Adventist Church in Waco, Texas. At first I was indignant but then I realized the value of his question. The ultimate answer is “who knows?” No-one does for certain.

It is my opinion that the government was out to get Koresh and his senior worshippers and would have slaughtered them all anyway. Austin and I disagree on the nature of the events that unfolded in Waco twenty years ago. That’s the beauty of America, we can agree to disagree.

There was much disagreement in early 1993, regarding the pre-assualt on the church. For instance, the warrant obtained by the Imperial stormtroopers was defective. Perhaps they could not decide on what, if anything, was wrong with Koresh and Co. That might explain the defects in the law sited to obtain the warrant. The local Sheriff and the State of Texas disagreed with the feds that crimes were being committed in the church. A JAG officer (military attorney), when asked about the legality of deploying military assets for this domestic law enforcement “operation,” disagreed with his inquirers. He reported the scheme was illegal, a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, etc. The first Stormtroopers on the scene must have disagreed about the wisdom of carrying communication devices in case something went wrong, whether to open fire immediately upon exiting their horse trailer (official police version), and whether the church members would return fire.

In the end, the dissenters were silenced. The rest is history. As I recall the Empire had several grounds for the War in Waco: 1) income tax evasion; 2) illegal drugs; 3) illegal firearms; and 4) the abuse of children. I think they eventually proved the tax count as they can prove that against almost anyone due to the psychotic nature of our tax laws and regulations. I think there was no evidence of the guns or drugs – any existing specimens would have been destroyed in the government’s fire. As for the children, while I recall some survivors insisted there had been some sort of impropriety, most (all?) of the children were killed in the fire or crushed to death beneath the Army’s 70-ton tank. Some may have been shot by snipers. Anyway, there wasn’t a lot of evidence after the fact.

Still, none of this answers Austin’s question. I’ll pose a question which is easy to answer definitively: Would a drone strike on Rev. Koresh been legal? Two questions, really – Would the drone strike have been ethical? The answer to both questions is a certain “NO!”

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution is clear – “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (Emphasis added). The Fourteenth Amendment backs up the Fifth’s Due Process provision. These concepts date back the Magna Carta in 1215. The truth is eternal, it remains the same in 1215, 1791, 1993, or 2013. The theory is that if the government wants to kill someone, they must adhere to a certain process. We generally refer to the key part of the process as a trial (Jury, evidence, and stuff). The theory jives with what that crazy carpenter, Jesus Christ, talked about twelve centuries before King John admitted his authority was not arbitrary.

For those of you who might have heard Austin and taken his question as a simple endorsement by mistake, how about this: Would Sheriff Whittle’s use of a drone against Scott Dean saved us the trouble and expense of a trial? He was convicted, after all, by twelve wise citizens. The fact of his innocence and his accuser’s later recantation are irrelevant for this discussion. For those of you fortunate enough not to live in Cornfield County, Scott Dean was a County Commissioner. He adopted some girls. One of the girls, a teenager with a history of lying in court, accused him of a heinous crime. He denied any guilt but was convicted none the less. He went to prison. Then, his lying adopted daughter, safely out of the country, admitted she made the story up and Dean was in fact innocent.

Since the recent revelation of Dean’s innocence I’m sure the twelve men and women who sent him to prison have the utmost difficulty sleeping at night. Can you imagine the Sheriff’s guilt and shame had he used a drone instead of the law? Natural Law and its proper extensions in the corporeal world are important. “I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!” Saint Thomas More, A Man For All Seasons, 1966.

Due Process of law is a Natural Right to which every person is entitled when human laws exist. This was obvious to earlier generations of Americans.